My home church priest forwarded this to us after verifying the truth. I am providing this link to the mebers of the forum as a courtesy and request if you are a US citizen you consider signing the petition.

the link doesn't give us aany real details. how long has he been here? where is he from? did he have a visa of some sort that expired?

At the page is a tab with a letter that gives the details such as they are. In answer to most of your questions:

10 yearsboth he and his wife worked full time until they were detained.Visa status unknown, it is common for years to go by with an expired visa while trying to get a new one.Orda is the family name and the details are sketchy at best.

Logged

Just a poor wayfaring stranger passing through (from an old American Folk song)

Thanks to the moderator for moving this story because it is a non-religious story. The man did not follow the rules. So many people want to emigrate. Let him go back and live with his parents and go through the proper chanels.Here is the whole story:2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 14388,*;334 Fed. Appx. 991VIKTOR SERGEYEVICH ORDA, SVETLANA VALERIEVNA ORDA, OKSANA VIKTOROVNA ORDA,Petitioners, versus U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent.

Viktor Sergeyevich Orda, with his daughter and wife as derivative beneficiaries,petitions this court for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' (the "BIA")affirmance of the Immigration Judge's (the "IJ") order of removal and denial ofasylum and withholding of removal. For the reasons discussed below, we denyOrda's petition for review.

I.

In 2001, Orda, accompanied by his wife Svetlana and daughter Oksana, arrived inthe United States on an immigrant visa. In 2005, the INS issued notices toappear, alleging that Orda was a native of the Soviet Union and a citizen of theUkraine, that Svetlana was a native of the Soviet Union and citizen ofLithuania, that Oksana was a native and citizen of Lithuania, and that all threehad remained beyond the expiration [*2] period of their visas and weretherefore removable under INA § 237(a)(1)(B). Orda timely applied for asylum andwithholding of removal, claiming that he was entitled to relief because his wifeand daughter had suffered persecution in the Ukraine based on their status asRussian-speaking Lithuanian citizens. n1 Svetlana and Oksana did not file theirown applications for relief, but proceeded as derivative beneficiaries of Orda'sapplication.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - Footnotes - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -1

Orda also claimed that he had a well-founded fear of future persecution inLithuania because he had formerly been persecuted in Lithuania on account of hisethnicity and nationality. The IJ found, however, that because Orda admittedthat he was a citizen of Ukraine, Ukraine was the country of removal and theonly pertinent inquiry was whether Orda had a reasonable fear of futurepersecution in the event of his removal to Ukraine. Orda's allegations ofpersecution in Lithuania, therefore, were irrelevant to his well-founded fearanalysis. The BIA adopted this portion of the IJ's decision and Orda does notraise this issue in his petition to this court. The issue, therefore, has beenabandoned. See Sepulveda v. U.S. Att'y Gen., 401 F.3d 1226, 1228 (11th Cir.2005).- - - - - - - - - - - - End Footnotes- - - - - - - - - - - - - -

At [*3] the merits hearing before the IJ, Orda admitted the allegations of thenotices to appear and conceded removability. Orda and Svetlana then testifiedand their testimony, in relevant part, was as follows: Orda was born in Ukraineand had been a soldier in the Soviet Army prior to the dissolution of the SovietUnion. While he was a soldier, he was stationed in Ukraine for a time and thenin Lithuania. Orda and Svetlana lived in Lithuania from 1989 through 2001; theirdaughter Oksana was born there in 1990. After the former Soviet states declaredindependence in 1991, there was a movement of nationalism among these states andLithuanians began to discriminate against and persecute native Russians andUkranians. Orda was discriminated against and beaten in Lithuania because he wasa Russian-speaking Ukranian national and had been an officer with the Sovietarmy. Svetlana was also discriminated against because she was Russian-speaking.Seeking a better life, the family relocated to Ukraine from December 1993through January 1994. When they arrived in Ukraine, however, hotel employeesrefused to allow Svetlana and Oksana to stay in the hotel because they wereLithuanian and the family was [*4] forced to sleep in their car in the cold.Ukranian authorities informed Svetlana and Oksana that they could never obtaincitizenship in Ukraine and should just go back to Lithuania. Thereafter, Ordacontacted his former classmate Nikolay Gordyak, who was then the chief detectiveof the Ministry of Internal Affairs, for assistance in getting a Ukranianpassport for his wife and daughter. Under the pretense of helping with thepaperwork, Gordyak invited Svetlana to his office, where he raped her and toldher that she would be killed if she told anybody. After this incident, thefamily returned to Lithuania, where they remained until coming to the UnitedStates in 2001. Orda himself experienced no trouble from the Ukranian governmentduring the trip and his parents continue to live in Ukraine without incident. Ifhe and his family were to return to Ukraine, however, Orda fears Gordyak wouldharm him because Gordyak "hates [Orda] personally because [he] got married to"Svetlana, who was Gordyak's "first love."

In addition to this testimony, Orda submitted the 2006 Country Reports for bothLithuania and Ukraine. Both reports acknowledge that violence against women andpolice corruption are [*5] problems in these countries. The Ukranian report,however, indicated that the law prohibited rape and a number of rapes had beenreported to police.

Based upon this evidence, the IJ found Orda to be credible, but concluded thatOrda did not suffer past persecution in Ukraine himself and had not shown thathe had a well-founded fear of persecution in the event of his removal toUkraine. With respect to Svetlana's rape, the IJ found that this crime had beenmotivated by Gordyak's personal feelings and did not constitute persecution onaccount of a protected ground. Accordingly, the IJ denied the requested relief.

Orda appealed to the BIA, which affirmed the IJ's determination that Orda, asthe lead respondent, had failed to meet his burden of proof for asylum. The BIAfound that Orda was never personally harmed in Ukraine and that nothing in theevidence indicated that the rape of Orda's wife was motivated by a protectedground. The BIA also explained that, because every applicant for personal asylummust establish his or her individual eligibility for relief, a grant of asylumto the principal applicant can not be based upon harm to one of theapplication's derivative beneficiaries. Accordingly, [*6] the BIA found thatOrda's asylum claim could not be granted based upon his wife and daughter's fearof persecution in Ukraine. For these reasons, the BIA dismissed Orda's appeal.

II.

We review only the decision of the BIA, except to the extent it expressly adoptsthe IJ's opinion. De Santamaria v. U.S. Att'y Gen., 525 F.3d 999, 1006 (11thCir. 2008).We review the BIA's factual determinations under the substantialevidence test and will "affirm the [BIA's] decision if it is supported byreasonable, substantial, and probative evidence on the record considered as awhole." Id. "To conclude that the BIA's decision should be reversed, we mustfind that the record not only supports the conclusion, but compels it."Niftaliev v. U.S. Att'y Gen., 504 F.3d 1211, 1215 (11th Cir. 2007).

III.

To be eligible for asylum, an alien must establish status as a "refugee."Sepulveda, 401 F.3d at 1230. The statute defines "refugee" as:

[A]ny person who is outside any country of such person's nationality . . . andwho is unable or unwilling to return to, and is unable or unwilling to availhimself or herself of the protection of, that country because of persecution ora well-founded fear of persecution on account [*7] of race, religion,nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.8U.S.C. § 1101(a)(42)(A). An alien may demonstrate status as a refugee primarilyeither by establishing well-founded fear of persecution or establishing pastpersecution, which gives rise to a rebuttable presumption of a well-foundedfear. See Sepulveda, 401 F.3d at 1230-31. Past persecution exists when the alienestablishes he has suffered persecution in the past in the relevant country onaccount of one of the protected grounds, and is unable or unwilling to returnto, or avail himself of the protection of, the country in question. 8 C.F.R. §208.13(b)(1). The government may then attempt to rebut the presumed well-foundedfear that arises from the finding of past persecution by demonstrating either afundamental change in circumstances in the country or that the applicant couldavoid future persecution by relocating to a different area of the country. Id. §208.13(b)(1)(i).

In his petition for review, Orda argues, inter alia, that substantial evidencedoes not support the BIA's factual determination that Svetlana's rape was notinflicted on account of a protected ground. He notes that an [*8] applicantfor asylum "need not conclusively show why persecution occurred," Matter of S-P,21 I.&N. Dec. 486 (BIA 1996), and must only "produce evidence from which it isreasonable to believe that the harm was motivated, at least in part, by anactual or imputed ground." INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 112 S. Ct. 812,117 L. Ed. 2d 38 (1992). Orda points out that the record contains the StateDepartment Report on Ukraine, which notes that police corruption, violenceagainst women, and harassment of ethnic minorities are serious problems inUkraine. Given this evidence of the country conditions, Orda claims that therecord compels a finding that Svetlana's mixed ethnicity and non-Ukraniancitizenship rendered her particularly vulnerable to abuse by the police andothers. Although he admits that Gordyak had a personal history with Svetlana,Orda asserts that Gordyak would not have raped her but for her status as avulnerable Russian-speaking migrant of mixed ethnicity. Accordingly, Ordaasserts that the BIA erred in finding as a matter of fact that Svetlana's rapewas not on account of a protected ground.

We must affirm the BIA's factual determinations if they are "supported byreasonable, substantial, and probative [*9] evidence on the record consideredas a whole." De Santamaria, 525 F.3d at 1006. If substantial evidence supportsthe BIA's findings that an alien suffered particular harms for reasons otherthan his or her race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular socialgroup, or political opinion, the petition for review will be denied. See, e.g.,Scheerer v. U.S. Att'y Gen., 445 F.3d 1311, 1316 (11th Cir. 2006) (substantialevidence supported IJ's conclusion that applicant's prosecution in his homecountry was not due to his political opinion). In this case, Orda's owntestimony indicates that Gordyak had previously been in love with his wife andthat he was angry because she had married Orda instead of him. This testimonyprovides substantial support for the IJ and BIA's finding that Gordyak'scriminal conduct was motivated by his personal desire to humiliate his formerlove-interest and to punish Orda, his rival and former classmate. We thereforeaffirm the IJ and BIA's factual determination that Orda's wife was raped forreasons other than her ethnicity or nationality. For this reason, we concludethat Orda has not established that he -- or any member of his family -- sufferedpersecution [*10] in the past in the relevant country on account of one of theprotected grounds. n2

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - Footnotes - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -2

Orda also argues that the BIA erred in holding that his asylum claim may not bebased upon his wife's persecution in Ukraine. Because we conclude that therecord supports the BIA's finding that his wife was not persecuted on account ofa protected ground in Ukraine, this argument is moot and we do not consider it.- - - - - - - - - - - - End Footnotes- - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Without past persecution, Orda is not presumed to have a well-founded fear ofpersecution and the record does not show that Orda has an objective basis tofear future harm in the Ukraine. Accordingly, the BIA's denial of Orda'sapplication for asylum and withholding of removal was proper and we deny thepetition for review.

Actually, Fr. Vikto DID follow the rules, so what you have just said on a public forum is libel.He applied in a "timely" manner for Asylum in the US, and is therefore an Asylum Seeker. The US is a signatory to the UN Refugee Convention and therefore, the US immigration department is required to consider his application for refugee status. His application for refugee status was rejected. He did not break any rules as you claim. It is not illegal to seek asylum.

Sorry, but in Lithuania, there is NO problem for Russian speakers (as opposed to Latvia and Estonia). And even if there was, as EU citizens, they are free to move to the UK or some other place in Europe wherethey would have no problem. They can also l ive in Ukraine, which has become strongly pro-Russian since Yanukovych is in power. And if they are ethnic Russians, they can also apply for Russian citizenship and move to Russia. Sorry, but there is absolutely no need for them to be in the US.

(I would also encourage Orthodox Priests to have more than one child. Mine has been blessed with five.)

Sorry, but in Lithuania, there is NO problem for Russian speakers (as opposed to Latvia and Estonia). And even if there was, as EU citizens, they are free to move to the UK or some other place in Europe wherethey would have no problem. They can also l ive in Ukraine, which has become strongly pro-Russian since Yanukovych is in power. And if they are ethnic Russians, they can also apply for Russian citizenship and move to Russia. Sorry, but there is absolutely no need for them to be in the US.

(I would also encourage Orthodox Priests to have more than one child. Mine has been blessed with five.)

Knowing citizens of both countries, Ukraine and Lithuania,for several years (over 10) I would have to dispute both of your assertions:

1. no problem in Lithuania as Russians speakers

2. no problem in the Ukraine.

There are ethnic tensions in the Ukraine between the Russian population and the Ukrainian population that do not always make the news. Having been victimized by the Ukrainian police myself and considering my wife an extension of myself and I an extension of her I find the BIA and the IJ naive in their world view suspecting they love the "law" more than they see reality. I know of several citizens who are in the US who state they were victimized by people in Lithuanian due to their Russian roots. I also know and have spoken with several Lithuanian citizens who admit to discriminating against native Russians. Immigration to the US is difficult and made more so by our jingoistic attitude. In this case I find the legal representatives have erred in two areas: 1. a family is a whole unit comprised of individuals, a threat to one is a threat to all. 2. Police corruption is a significant factor in the refugee status of Viktor Orda.

Finally the people in his area need him as does their church. So to say let him go elsewhere when a good work is being performed is not exactly saying he has value to the community where he is.

Logged

Just a poor wayfaring stranger passing through (from an old American Folk song)

There are ethnic tensions in the Ukraine between the Russian population and the Ukrainian population that do not always make the news.

No, there are not. There are political tensions between nationalists and pro-Russian. The majority of the latter actually are ethnic Ukrainians. The current president also is pro-Russian, so it is absurd to say pro-Russians would be "persecuted" in Ukraine.

Having been victimized by the Ukrainian police myself and considering my wife an extension of myself and I an extension of her I find the BIA and the IJ naive in their world view suspecting they love the "law" more than they see reality.

Facts, please. What happened exactly?And then again, what the heck does all this have to do with the US? If you want to be accepted as a Russian, just go to Russia.

I know of several citizens who are in the US who state they were victimized by people in Lithuanian due to their Russian roots. I also know and have spoken with several Lithuanian citizens who admit to discriminating against native Russians.

If someone doesnt speak Lithuanian well, it can be a problem. The solution would be to learn the language.

There are ethnic tensions in the Ukraine between the Russian population and the Ukrainian population that do not always make the news.

No, there are not. There are political tensions between nationalists and pro-Russian. The majority of the latter actually are ethnic Ukrainians. The current president also is pro-Russian, so it is absurd to say pro-Russians would be "persecuted" in Ukraine.

Having been victimized by the Ukrainian police myself and considering my wife an extension of myself and I an extension of her I find the BIA and the IJ naive in their world view suspecting they love the "law" more than they see reality.

Facts, please. What happened exactly? Response: Not for publication.And then again, what the heck does all this have to do with the US? If you want to be accepted as a Russian, just go to Russia. Response: Why would a person want to be accepted for Russian who is an American? I am perfectly happy with my mongrel background of Norwegian, Scot, English, Irish, German, and whatever else my ancestors threw in the mix. I am fluent in Russian and have made friends in multiple countries because I play futbol. Many of these countries are former soviet bloc countries.

I know of several citizens who are in the US who state they were victimized by people in Lithuanian due to their Russian roots. I also know and have spoken with several Lithuanian citizens who admit to discriminating against native Russians.

If someone doesnt speak Lithuanian well, it can be a problem. The solution would be to learn the language. Response: Or go somewhere you are understood if you do not wish to be presecuted for your nationality the US normally but I understand Canada these days might be a better choice. I was in Toronto last year and they had a good sized eastern population.

Finally the people in his area need him as does their church. So to say let him go elsewhere when a good work is being performed is not exactly saying he has value to the community where he is.

If his church needs him, they should petition for an employment-based visa, not asylum.

Finally some agreement. However since his originial visa was as an aslyum seeker he pursued that avenue. Maybe he can apply for a business visa but doubr he would get one. However he might try one as a religious worker unfortunately he is bi-vocational. However I still remain the voca that the BIA and IJ got it wrong when they divide his wife's issues form his person.

Logged

Just a poor wayfaring stranger passing through (from an old American Folk song)

Response: Or go somewhere you are understood if you do not wish to be presecuted for your nationality the US normally

Is it "normal" to go to the US, if you have that wish? I think the normal cases of immigrating to the US are the ones specified by immigration laws. Asylum always is an exceptional case, It should be available in cases of fleeing real persecution (and not just "feeling not welcome"). And as I said, Russians are not persecuted or even discriminated in Russia, which is next door to both Lithuania and Ukraine. So there is no point in going to the US, except for economical reasons.

He should leave the US alone, his case causes harm to both real asylum seekers and the reputations of the Orthodox Church. Probably he has learnt good English during his time in the US, and Lithuanian citizenship will enable him to settle in the UK or in Ireland, both of which do not discriminate against Russian speakers any more than the US does.

1. Actually, Fr. Vikto DID follow the rules, so what you have just said on a public forum is libel.He applied in a "timely" manner for Asylum in the US, and is therefore an Asylum Seeker. The US is a signatory to the UN Refugee Convention and therefore, the US immigration department is required to consider his application for refugee status. His application for refugee status was rejected. He did not break any rules as you claim. It is not illegal to seek asylum.

[bgcolor=#eb0000]2. [/bgcolor] Must be because of the ignorance of the English language. "Emigrate" means to leave a country.

1. Not the way I understand the issue: He & his wife came on immigrant visas in 2001. Then in 2005 they tried to claim asylum.2> I meant what I said. Many people in various countries want to emigrate: that is leave their native country and go elsewhere.

(I would also encourage Orthodox Priests to have more than one child. Mine has been blessed with five.)

On what many of them are paid?

Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.A hasty quarrel kindles fire,and urgent strife sheds blood.If you blow on a spark, it will glow;if you spit on it, it will be put out; and both come out of your mouth

1. Actually, Fr. Vikto DID follow the rules, so what you have just said on a public forum is libel.He applied in a "timely" manner for Asylum in the US, and is therefore an Asylum Seeker. The US is a signatory to the UN Refugee Convention and therefore, the US immigration department is required to consider his application for refugee status. His application for refugee status was rejected. He did not break any rules as you claim. It is not illegal to seek asylum.

1. Not the way I understand the issue: He & his wife came on immigrant visas in 2001. Then in 2005 they tried to claim asylum.

How is that "not following the rules"? Particularly when the court report says the application for asylum was "timely"? It doesn't matter how an asylum seeker gets to a UN Refugee Convention signatory country (whether with a visa, or indeed, no documentation at all). Provided they apply for Asylum in a timely manner (that is, before their current visa runs out or within a fixed number of days after arrival with no documentation), they are an Asylum Seeker. Their case was considered and their application for Protection as Refugees was rejected. Thats fine. But what law did they break to justify you saying that "the man did not follow the rules"?

Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

Response: Or go somewhere you are understood if you do not wish to be presecuted for your nationality the US normally

Is it "normal" to go to the US, if you have that wish? I think the normal cases of immigrating to the US are the ones specified by immigration laws. Asylum always is an exceptional case, It should be available in cases of fleeing real persecution (and not just "feeling not welcome"). And as I said, Russians are not persecuted or even discriminated in Russia, which is next door to both Lithuania and Ukraine. So there is no point in going to the US, except for economical reasons.

He should leave the US alone, his case causes harm to both real asylum seekers and the reputations of the Orthodox Church. Probably he has learnt good English during his time in the US, and Lithuanian citizenship will enable him to settle in the UK or in Ireland, both of which do not discriminate against Russian speakers any more than the US does.

You wish specifics on my claim because without the gossipy details you will decide to impugn my integrity and determine I am not honest? Sorry I will not help you there, live with your dubious feelings I am content that I am an honest person not prone to making false claims.

11 million illegal aliens (a figure widely quoted by the US News media) would disagree with your statement and say yes it is normal to go to the US if you have that wish.

As for feeling welcome in Russia, ummm.... I can only speak with the reaction of some of the Russians I know...but I don't think eyeball rolling translates well, do you?

I do not see his request or his efforts as an "harm" to the Orthodox Church, can you please explain to me and illuminate my ignorance in how his efforts "harm" the Orthodox Church?

Logged

Just a poor wayfaring stranger passing through (from an old American Folk song)

That's a terribly sad story. He sounds and looks like a very caring and gentle priest.

His abilities as a priest are not the issue. he can be a good priest in his homeland. His parent live there and he probably has more family too.

If he really wants to immigrate, let him go back to Ukraine and apply to immigrate with the proper visa etc. and not trying to make bogus claims of refugee status.

I don't recall any of the claims being bogus. I am sorry if I appear slow of brain. By Father Viktor made a claim, provided evidence to his claim and had it rejected. It does not make his claim any less valid, it just means the case law did not support his interpretation of his claim. The use of bogus insinuates a false basis for his statements, or a lie. Are you suggesting Father Viktor lied?

Logged

Just a poor wayfaring stranger passing through (from an old American Folk song)

I have to agree with George on this one, that the only illegal act was the expiry of the Visas which is a removable offense under the aforementioned code section. Since the request for asylum was timely and was considered by no less than 3 separate bodies (INS, immigration judge, Federal Court) this was proper treatment under US immigration law. Further, the decision was that asylum was not warranted under this set of facts and circumstances. As a result of the denial of asylum the only remaining act is the overstay of visas which again is a removable act under immigration laws.

In summary they did nothing illegal, but rather are being subjected to the rulings which are correct under US law.

I disagree. The priest came here on an immigrant visa, was ordained here. He made false claims of being a refugee and was deported or about to be deported.This is a good lesson to his parish that you have to follow the law. No bribes to gogvernment officials and no false claims.Notice how his church jurisdiction the ROCOR is not involved inthis at all? Any church can start the process have clergy immigrante under a special classification of religious worker.The parish needs to be assigned a priest who is honest and moral.

I disagree. The priest came here on an immigrant visa, was ordained here. He made false claims of being a refugee and was deported or about to be deported.This is a good lesson to his parish that you have to follow the law. No bribes to gogvernment officials and no false claims.Notice how his church jurisdiction the ROCOR is not involved inthis at all? Any church can start the process have clergy immigrante under a special classification of religious worker.The parish needs to be assigned a priest who is honest and moral.

That's pretty intense to accuse him of being immoral, just because he felt his family was persecuted!

To me it sounded like in one place Fr. Viktor gets persecuted, in the other, his wife and child get persecuted. So while they can go back to one of their home countries, they can't be in one place without someone getting harassed. And if the solution is for them to live in Russia, why shouldn't they live anywhere, like America?

Considering there was a family from Germany given political asylum in the US because they weren't allowed to homeschool, I think Fr. Viktor's circumstances should have qualified. At the very least, the family should be allowed to stay here and apply for permanent residency with a normal application. They are not criminals or troublemakers, and Fr. Viktor provides a needed service for the community in Florida. I hope his bishop is all over this and Orthodox hierarchs will be stepping in on his behalf.

Logged

He spoke it as kindly and heartily as could be; as if a man dashed a gallon of cold water in your broth and never doubted you'd like it all the better.

That's pretty intense to accuse him of being immoral, just because he felt his family was persecuted!

I hope his bishop is all over this and Orthodox hierarchs will be stepping in on his behalf.

He did not provide any proof that his family was persecuted and lost the appeal too. Thanks for your last comment.Because it speaks volumes that the ROCOR is not standing up for him. Why is that? Because what he did Making false claims is wrong. That is not the right thing for a Christian to do.

That's pretty intense to accuse him of being immoral, just because he felt his family was persecuted!

I hope his bishop is all over this and Orthodox hierarchs will be stepping in on his behalf.

He did not provide any proof that his family was persecuted and lost the appeal too. Thanks for your last comment.Because it speaks volumes that the ROCOR is not standing up for him. Why is that? Because what he did Making false claims is wrong. That is not the right thing for a Christian to do.

Where is your proof he made false claims? The court agreed that his claims were valid statements of fact. Does not sound like a false claim to me. What the court then followed on to say was they did not agree, and had case law to back it up, with his interpretation of the facts. You keep saying false claim and embarrass the church. I must be very thick because I do not see a false claim. He applied for refuge status as many do and the agency denied it basis for his visa. Fr Viktor has done nothing wrong nor has he made false statements. He is also free to adjust his visa request if he desires. Please enlighten me with wisdom, show me the false claim. I happen to disagree with the court. I think their precedent was solid but ignored the basic relationship of a man and a woman in marriage. Am I making a false claim?

Logged

Just a poor wayfaring stranger passing through (from an old American Folk song)

The false claim was that his wife was raped because of her status and not the truth that she was raped because the man was her former boyfriend. (read the post above with the records). The other false claim was that he & his family suffered persecution. (Read the post above with the records or go to the web site yourself)Thousands of immigrants come over every year without making false claims of refugee status. This is a moral issue and that is why his church is not supporting him in his false claims.

Especially the conclusion:U.S. Att'y Gen., 445 F.3d 1311, 1316 (11th Cir. 2006) (substantial evidence supported IJ's conclusion that applicant's prosecution in his home country was not due to his political opinion). In this case, Orda's own testimony indicates that Gordyak had previously been in love with his wife and that he was angry because she had married Orda instead of him. This testimony provides substantial support for the IJ and BIA's finding that Gordyak's criminal conduct was motivated by his personal desire to humiliate his former love-interest and to punish Orda, his rival and former classmate. We therefore affirm the IJ and BIA's factual determination that Orda's wife was raped for reasons other than her ethnicity or nationality. For this reason, we conclude that Orda has not established that he -- or any member of his family -- suffered persecution [*10] in the past in the relevant country on account of one of the protected grounds. n2

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - Footnotes - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -2

Orda also argues that the BIA erred in holding that his asylum claim may not be based upon his wife's persecution in Ukraine. Because we conclude that the record supports the BIA's finding that his wife was not persecuted on account of a protected ground in Ukraine, this argument is moot and we do not consider it.- - - - - - - - - - - - End Footnotes- - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Without past persecution, Orda is not presumed to have a well-founded fear of persecution and the record does not show that Orda has an objective basis to fear future harm in the Ukraine. Accordingly, the BIA's denial of Orda's application for asylum and withholding of removal was proper and we deny the petition for review.

What do you think about the claims that a Ukrainian hotel wouldn't give people rooms because they were Lithuanian? That sounds strange?

And doesn't it sound strange that a police chief would rape someone right in the office? I mean, I think it could happen, but, really? Wouldn't people overhear sounds, or couldn't she call for help?

I would like for the people to come to America, because we shouldn't have borders (joke). well actually I think societies do better when they have more diversity, and Eastern European culture is nice. Eastern Europeans are also part of our heritage in America, especially in industrial areas.But I am just reading this an thinking it sounds surprising, even for as wacky a place as Ukraina. What do you think?

What do you think about the claims that a Ukrainian hotel wouldn't give people rooms because they were Lithuanian? That sounds strange?

And doesn't it sound strange that a police chief would rape someone right in the office? I mean, I think it could happen, but, really? Wouldn't people overhear sounds, or couldn't she call for help?

I would like for the people to come to America, because we shouldn't have borders (joke). well actually I think societies do better when they have more diversity, and Eastern European culture is nice. Eastern Europeans are also part of our heritage in America, especially in industrial areas.But I am just reading this an thinking it sounds surprising, even for as wacky a place as Ukraina. What do you think?

Yes! This is a perfectly valid reason to stay. Why should he be deported?

The Judicial system found the witness "credible" as it says in the report attached. Granted, the courts are supposed to be sympathetic to asylum seekers, because evidence is hard to get from other countries.

Their reasoning was different- they figured it was just an ex-boyfriend - girlfriend deal, not persecution for being Lithuanian. That's not to say the Court found it OK or something. It's just that to get asylum, you need persecution based on nationality, gender, etc. Just being violated isn't necessarily the kind of thing that fits someone into the category of a refugee.

So this doesn't really answer the question- doesn't this sound somewhat doubftul, even for Ukraine. I mean, denying someone a place in a hitel just because theyre Lithuanian?

What do you think about the claims that a Ukrainian hotel wouldn't give people rooms because they were Lithuanian? That sounds strange?

And doesn't it sound strange that a police chief would rape someone right in the office? I mean, I think it could happen, but, really? Wouldn't people overhear sounds, or couldn't she call for help?

I would like for the people to come to America, because we shouldn't have borders (joke). well actually I think societies do better when they have more diversity, and Eastern European culture is nice. Eastern Europeans are also part of our heritage in America, especially in industrial areas.But I am just reading this an thinking it sounds surprising, even for as wacky a place as Ukraina. What do you think?

Yes! This is a perfectly valid reason to stay. Why should he be deported?

The American courts have made this decision after appeals which were heard and which did not provide any proof of persecution. So back he goes.